Leaderboard

Keep in mind, my own criticism is based on 1 1/2 episodes. Looking for hair in a nest was a cool idea. It seems better as it goes along, but I'll always be bothered by the stupid background music. So here is some manufactured drama I spoke of. Russell had to rappel down a cliff to save time... or somebody could've driven a jeep to within 100 yards of where he was. Every distance they mention about their positions is greatly exaggerated. Russell's '3 day climb' was west of the base camp (44.437298, -119.814284) , not east, and there are logging roads going up there. That whole graphic that shows the ridge east of base camp is BS. At minimum, it is flipped left to right, but it also doesn't indicate accurate N-S lines. It's tilted. That's probably all done so that nerds like us can't figure it out. I guess they underestimated us. Russell on the ridge is at about 44.438740, -119.866810, overlooking Rock Creek Lake, which is Southeast of his position at 44.428260, -119.830200. When Russell points on the map at water sources, his finger is at about 44.435300, -119.878090, which is West Branch Rock Creek. This may be a meaningless gesture for the camera. The lake with the name scribbled out is Rock Creek Lake (pictured above). The 6200 ft peak he was on is slightly above, and to the right of his finger. "W" is the ridge, and "X" is base camp. "Z" is where his finger is at. "Y" was that little lake noted in the LIDAR scan.

I must be in the minority because I like the series a lot. They've had: 1) Thermal results, which we can debate what it was 2) A hair found that was reviewed by Jeff Medrum and found not to possess a medulla. 3) Eyeshine recorded at a tall height 4) A wood knock response in the last episode 5) A scream/howl response in an earlier episode 6) A bed discovery of some type 7) I forgot to add that on the howl that was recorded, forensic sound analysis yielded infrasound. That's significant in my opinion. How much of this would I get if I went out for three weeks? The above seems like a lot of activity. I'd be absolutely thrilled. As far as the thermal recorded by Russell Acorn is concerned, I find it very interesting. It certainly looks like something upright and walking. It also looked larger than Russell and spooked a deer. What was it? What other choices are there other than a human or a sasquatch and what human would be out in the dark alone in a place that is reasonably remote? I'm sure they queried and inventoried the production crew so that's out of the question.

Airdale, that office window is clearly a hoax....I'm pretty sure that's just an enlarged heater vent.....

Hopefully it takes just one death to solve the mystery. But I like how you think. Body parts are easier to transport and are proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. The key is figuring out their patterns. I do not wood knock, whoop or any of that stuff. I have no idea what I am saying, nor does anyone else. The only sure fire message I can send is by varmint calling. Ringing the dinner bell. The sound of a dying rabbit or bleating fawn is a universally recognized predator/prey relationship. So I have been concentrating on that when I go out.

It's probably more presentable than other roles I like to play.

Hahaha... Most threads end up discussing firearms, off-road vehicles, new gadgets or fieldcraft. I love it!

Seems to me that hair samples found in several areas, all lacking a medula, and with matching dna ("human") is a scientific paper begging to be published, even if one can't point at it and proclaim it to be sasquatch. You can damned sure point at it and call it a scientific question.

Thanks. And funny you mention it. My dog got into the chocolate truffles that we had at Christmas. Of course, it was the weekend, so our normal vet was closed. I learned that you can give a dog 3% hydrogen peroxide to induce vomiting if the product ingested happened less than an hour ago. 1 teaspoon per ten pounds of dog. Shot it down his throat with a needleless syringe. Barfomatic not long after. Sorry, didn't mean to derail your thread, BigTex. BigTex, I have left audio recorders out as well. Non-camoed. Got some tapping as well. I think JKH is right. They don't like to be tricked, but if you just leave it out, you're good. Maybe.

If money were object, this is what I'd get. It would easily fit in a backpack and can chamber several different rounds. https://www.wildwestguns.com/custom-guns/ak-co-pilot/

Was there any discussion about dna analysis on this hair? If 40,000 year old bone fragments can yield enough dna to confirm the existence of a hominid (Denisova Man), one would thing that a hair that is virtually as fresh as a McDonalds lunch salad ought to provide something.

There are a lot of people who will call any 400 yard shot on big game irresponsible. I'm not one of them, but I'm really particular on where I would try such a shot, and I never shoot for the head on big game. I went ground squirrel shooting with my brother once. That's his favorite hunting. They shoot the heads off of them at 300-500 yards, and I did it with his rifles, so I know it can be done, but that ain't sasquatch hunting, bear hunting, or even deer hunting. If you botch a shot, it's no big deal. His rifles are incredibly fine tuned, are chambered firbthe mist accurate calibers there are, and the scopes are extremely high powered and expensive. I prefer meat hunting, but different strokes for different folks. Just a point you might want to consider: Alaskan big game guides like to get their clients to shoot big bears at the range of 125 yards, regardless of how good a shot the client is or what he's shooting. The reasoning is that 125 yards is a good range to allow time for follow up shots on a possible charging bear, it's close enough for good shot placement on the first shot, and there isn't much energy loss like there is at 200 yards and farther. I shoot a 300 WinMag at caribou at the longer ranges, so even at 400 yards, there is still plenty of energy left for a 450 lb. ungulate. I would consider shooting a grizzly at 200 yards with that rifle (200 grain Swift A-Frames) to be maximum range. Anything farther is asking for trouble, and following a wounded bear is the kind of trouble I really don't need.

Hey JKH.....funny you should mention an audio recorder.....I bought a really good one several years ago, very small, sound activated, and about $200. I made the stealthiest wrap I could and hid this thing extremely well, it was under some rocks, really was proud of myself for concealing it so well....NOT! Oh they found it the first night, took all the wrapping of the recorder in a way that took a lot of strength, threw that on the ground, and took the recorder. I posted about this a few years back......they ended up punishing me over this and quit coming around the gift tree for almost a year.

Yep. So have I. Wrote a book about it even. But in that book I categorically state that finding a dead one or a skeleton is top priority. And shooting one doesn't count as finding a dead one The shooting part is where things get complicated, as in the planning and deployment of the plan. The toughest part is guaranteeing the desired outcome which is scientific study and public disclosure of the results. That's where the true gauntlet exists. So, think it or not, grassing one gets one only halfway there. The other half is accomplishing a carefully laid out pre-existing avenue for success.

Meh......it is just the internet. But why don't you offer up a rebuttal on what's improbable about my skill set. Your questioning of it would in reality reveal your own ignorance of the subject matter, my skill set is actually quite unremarkable. Please go on......

Carried out to the woods to start a fire is one reason, I've found them, and one sites pictured above.

Well lets just say we located one (I know this is going to shock you but over the decades I've given this a lot of thought) so you and I have basically patterned a Bigfoot just like you can do with any other creature, meaning we know when and where he will be. I'm not worried about the legal ramifications, there won't be any. Here's why …... if we don't get torn to shreds by the bigfoot family. You and I were out hunting varmits with all our legal permits and this bear charged us and I shot it, you know because there is no Bigfoot. Now if your concerned about the body not being there when we get back, no problem we will have brought a battery powered reciprocating saw you would cut off his head while I'm laying down cover fire and hopefully killing the whole lot of them and we can harvest even more evidence, opps sorry if that's a little graphic like I said I've given this a lot of thought.

I experienced that whooping back and forth between two of them on my first encounter. That is the only vocalization that I am reasonably sure they make to each other when they are out of each others sight. That part of the BFRO report sure sounds authentic to me. The other thing it suggests, if accurate, along with several other tree stand sightings, is that they rarely look up and notice people in tree stands.. Their lack of neck and low set head may make looking up difficult. Extrapolating that is put your cameras high and they might not notice them.

Here's another one of those.....'odd places found in the woods'. The location is a very hard spot to even find, it's in a ravine down in a bowl low point, and rarely gets any wind, particularly from the North. In the spring & early summer it holds water, shown in the first pic, and is a fav watering hole. It dries up in mid summer, and by winter time, the weird stuff starts happening there. From a survival standpoint, if you were looking for a cozy spot on a cold night, this would be it. I've seen evidence of small fires, plus fire embers on nearby trails leading there dropped on the ground, and a few pics of what looks like a bedding area, all shown in the pics....one thing for sure, someone is having little fires down there and getting cozy:) The last pic was from the other day, and something had been down in there bedding down, which prompted me to find a few more pics from the past.

' Again with the "appeal to authority" for lack of results is a failed argument and then with the "not enough effort has been put into it by the right people" is a fail as well. I guess my point is with the deer hunting analogy is the only difference between you and a deer hunter is your quarry, and of course a deer hunters success rate. You as a Bigfoot researcher and I'm assuming a successful hunter struggle with why you can't apply the same techniques to Bigfoot hunting, your not the first and I'm sure you wont be the last to fail at your efforts, then start imagining all manner of extraordinary attributes that account for the failure to do so, I get it I've been there. I'm not closed minded at all, and at 60yrs old I'd suggest my experience far out weighs most on this website, which includes every type of conjectured behavior attributed to Bigfoot other than a face to face encounter, and obviously I've reached a different conclusion, than you have. I'd suggest a little self reflection on the closed mind issue, lets not make this personal. I'm still wide open to the possibility and would love for Biggie to be discovered. But your argument that we just haven't tried hard enough is pretty weak. You might just be looking in the wrong place for another upright biped, carry yourself to South America or Africa and you might get lucky. Now there I agree with you, in one of those locations you would need a well funded, long duration project, but in the U.S. not so much. What I would suggest to you and anyone else new to the subject is first do a deep dive into the history of the flora and fauna as it relates to the U.S. continent, what you'll find is not a lot of critters escaped our dinner tables and any that were a perceived threat, including another biped were brought to the brink of extinction, its astounding that anything over 10lbs escaped our attention. I'm not trying to denigrate you or your opinion, just offering up a different take on the phenomenon that is Bigfoot. Starting to think about Spring Gobbler season in Virginia, I'll be in numerous Bigfoot hotspots any suggestions?

Listen to your own logic. If there was little difference between hunting a deer and hunting a Bigfoot? We would have a body by now. So you must believe the reason that hasn’t happened is because there is nothing to shoot. If that is the case? Then why are you here? If something possibly is out there and remains undiscovered? Then why yes the moniker of “forest ninja” is applicable. As a hunter I can assure you of this. Each species has its own unique challenges. And hunting a deer is not the same as hunting a bear or a cougar or a turkey. Getting you to within 200 yards of a Bigfoot so you can “ear hole it” isn’t hunting. That’s just target practice. A 10 year old child can accomplish that. The trick is getting within 200 yards for a shot..... that’s the hunting part. Which is not easy. Science needs a body to prove this species real. No amount of reports will accomplish this, your right. But the reports must be compelling enough to make someone go look with a rifle? Are you out looking with a rifle? Conjecture on behavior is a necessary part of formulating a game plan. I’ve never understood that with skeptics..... If I was hunting the Loch Ness monster, I’m going to have to read reports, formulate a game plan in order to get ahead of the beast. Or I could just ignore the reports and scour the mountain tops looking....right? Because the reports are all just conjecture! Again, either your compelled to go look or yer not. But this isn’t some game ran on a points system based on public opinion. Nobody needs to be “saved” from the evil profiteers of pseudo science. Caveat Emptor.

Maybe........maybe not. My caribou shots can be anywhere from 10 yards to as far as I dare shoot, but that's because they're fairly easy to sneak ip to, and they inhabit open ground. Sasquatches? They like the kind of terrain that black bears prefer, and one can have them just 20 yards away, but there's no way you'll see them, because it's a virtual jungle.

This is not entirely true. Certain groups like the Sierra club have some very deep-pockets donors. Moreover, among them are lawyers .. lawyers who do not have to be paid if they care enough about the issue themselves to donate their personal time. It is why they have been successful stopping logging, having timber sales suspended indefinitely, and generally quite successfully shutting the timber industry down in my region. The notion that the timber industry is unstoppable because of their economic impact is simply false. You have to find a different reason for the environmental groups not getting on board with bigfoot existence as a way to lock up public lands. They do have the means, they do have the money, they do have the public support in areas where it matters. MIB

I think it has to do with a variety of factors. 1 - Very low population and possibly even being on the brink of extinction. * Note- cougar number estimates are at about 30,000 in the US ( not including Canada ), has anyone here tried to film a cougar in an active pursuit ? ( I have ) It is difficult, and this with the use of a complete list of known/predictable habits in a simple animal ( something with a small brain comparatively ). 2 - Based on my interactions that they are naturally very shy and intelligent ( near human ). These creatures in most cases want nothing to do with humans in most cases, the instances of calm/curious approach seem to be under the presumption of the people being a non threat ( sleeping, hiking, occupied with XYZ ). 3 - The truth about the number of people in active pursuit. Most people here, Facebook and even on the conference podium are NOT real researchers. The majority of these people are simply Bigfoot enthusiasts who maybe spend 8 days a year out looking for tracks along popular hiking trails or near their favorite lake that looks " squatchy ". This in truth is a hobby or small interest compared to the other throws of life. I would put money down that maybe 5% - 10% of those who claim the title actually put in any serious amount of effort, money and time into research. Not very many needles in the haystack and what few that exist are actively avoiding the very tiny number of people searching.

Nothing striking just the way he says he's familiar with the area. He humps his stand in the dark 2 or 3 miles then says he clears out a spot. Still in the dark not really knowing exactly if there's any obstructions once you haul or maybe in his case use a climber getting up the tree. Then he climbs back down and walks around for 20 minutes to wake up after the sun comes up knowing that's the prime time to at least make your self stay awake in your stand. Maybe I'm just nit- picking

If you say so.

You are not worth my time to discuss firearms or hunting . Enjoy your stay here.

What? No upvotes for my witty cynicism?

I've never shot at anything I was not absolutely sure of what it was, and I've never missed anything I've shot at with my rifle. My longest head shot was 400yrds. Now that I'm finished bragging, please understand that I passed on a lot more shots than I took, the 400 yrd shot was passed up on dozens of times due to weather. Also understand that shot was basically taken on a private shooting range, I was the only person allowed to hunt this property and while it was not remote, access was very restricted by water and multiple other properties with fencing. I had 6 deer stands and knew the distances to every spot that the deer would show up at and had practiced the 400yrd shot. There was no question about what I was shooting at but the secured access allowed for some very odd behavior of the deer, they acted almost as if it was a safe zone, this is a behavior I witnessed over years of hunting on this site. Also understand that shooting skills are a perishable talent they go away quickly. But to answer your question today with my current rifle and skill set 200yrds for the ear hole shot beyond that, up to 400yrds center mass, the circumstance's would have to be perfect in regards to a guy in a suit issue. That's really always been my biggest issue with this discussion encouraging a bunch of novices to go out and shoot something on two feet, enough people get shot when they're not hunting for something on two feet. As far as the one behind me he dies first then I'll take the long shot.

Wow now your revealing your ignorance of Whitetail behavior...…..ya think they ever stand still? I will give you a pass and consider maybe you've only seen them bounding across the road from your car. Please go on....

LOL if only that was true, get me within 200-300yrds and I'll put 1 round in biggies earhole and the mystery will be solved.